In my previous Blog, I compared my AncestryDNA AutoCluster results to two of my siblings, Jon and Heidi. In this Blog, I will look at Sharon’s results:
For the previous three siblings, I looked at matches between 25 and 600 cM. For Sharon, I lowered the upper limit to 300 cM. This was to eliminate my 1st cousin’s daughter’s results.
Here are my sibling comparisons:
By bringing Sharon’s upper limit down to 300 cM, I eliminated my father’s first cousin, a daughter of a maternal first cousin and a paternal 2nd cousin. However, many of my paternal second cousins have tested.
Comparing My Clusters to My Three Siblings’ Clusters
Rather than trying to figure out each of Sharon’s clusters, I will compare her clusters to mine. To do this, I compared my clusters to Sharon’s in MS Access. This just saves time. The Query in Access looks like this:
I connected our two tables by the identifier. This is the identifier of the different AncestryDNA matches. Then I chose my clusters and Sharon’s clusters and I grouped them to get rid of duplicates. That Query resulted in this:
This is a lot easier than going through Sharon’s clusters one by one. The above table tells me a few things:
- 13 of Sharon’s 18 clusters can be identified in my clusters.
- I split Sharon’s Cluster 1 into my Clusters 1 and 2.
- Sharon splits my Cluster 21 into her Clusters 3 and 18.
Here is how Sharon looks on my cluster list:
Sharon matches me on my Cluster 32 and 34 where Jon and Heidi did not.
Further Insight on My Cluster 32.
I have two matches in my Cluster 32. Sharon has three. Of those people, Louisa, in my Cluster 32 has a private tree but told me that we match on Simon Hathaway born 1711 and Hannah Clifton. Sharon’s additional person in her Cluster 13 is Gloria:
Gloria has a fairly good size tree which includes a Hathaway:
I wonder if Gloria’s Florida Hathaway is related to my Massachusetts Hathaway ancestors? To find this out, I need to build out Gloria’s Hathaway Line. Ancestry’s suggestions for Gloria’s tree matched up to Rufus Jefferson Pitts, but then I ran into a snag:
Gloria had Susan Hathaway for Rufus’ mother and Ancestry had Rebecca Pate. Here is the 1880 Census which seems to support the Rebecca theory:
I also found 10 Ancestry Trees. Three had Susan Hathaway as Rufus’ mother and seven had Rebecca Pate. After searching a bit, I found this narrative at Ancestry concerning Rufus’ father, John Gilbert Pitts:
This appears to resolve the discrepancy. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find out more about this Hathaway family.
Sharon’s Clusters Compared to Her Three Siblings’ Clusters
If I sort Sharon’s Clusters, I get this:
I’ll change this around and compare Sharon to her three siblings:
Sharon’s “new” clusters are 5 and 10. These are not shared by her siblings. Here are Sharon’s clusters sorted by size:
By cross-referencing, I get this:
Sharon’s “New” Clusters 5 and 10
That leaves two clusters to figure out. I’ll start with Cluster 5. Debra on Sharon’s match list has a family tree. However, I can’t tell how she might match. She has ancestors from a lot of the same places as my mother. I can tell that Cluster 5 is maternal due to Shared Matches with my mother.
Sharon’s Cluster 10
This cluster appears to be paternal based on a lack of Shared Matches with my mother. I note that Sharon has a match with Catherine who has a good tree and is on Gedmatch. Based on Chromosome mapping, I can tell that Catherine matches on our Frazer side. This side has ancestors in Ireland and so does Catherine.
Sharon and Catherine’s match is at the beginning of the Chromosome where Sharon matches Catherine on the Frazer (blue) side. Note that Heidi should match there also. Jim did not test at Ancestry. In fact, Heidi does match Catherine at Gedmatch by slightly more than Sharon. For some reason, Ancestry has shaved some DNA off Heidi and Catherine’s match to just below the 25 cM that I chose for the clusters.
Here is one of Catherine’s Irish ancestors who lived in the vicinity of my Irish ancestors:
Here are the final (for now) results:
Sharon has a lot of Frazer clusters.
It seemed like Sharon and I had a lot of Frazer matches. Sharon had the most proportionately. It would be difficult to deduce much from the maternal side as the numbers are low there. Jon had the fewest maternal clusters. It would be worthwhile to see which clusters only Jon had at some point.
Next up I’ll look at my Mom’s clusters. Then perhaps my other sister’s.
Summary and Conclusions
- By cross-referencing Sharon’s clusters with other existing clusters, I was able to speed up the cluster identification process.
- Sharon had two clusters that her other three siblings did not have. One was maternal and unidentified so far. Sharon’s other new cluster was on the Frazer quarter of ancestors and likely goes back Ireland where one of my brick wall areas is on the Clarke/Spratt Lines.
- I looked at percentages of clusters to see how the siblings compared to each other.
- I tried to connect genealogically to the Hathaway family to one of the matches in a cluster, but got stuck.